back and they guess what happened. how would theyknow?f.b.i. isinvestigating this. they weren't on the ground. if they knew so much about it, how come cnn got ahold of a diary by the ambassador? it's the most ridiculous concept i've heard. >> eric: so according to our reporter, u.s. officials confirm they had several intelligence assets on the ground, c.i.a. on the ground, sealing to protect assets. understand this. ambassador stevens was killed with another seal. four hours later, two more -- four hours later, two more seals were killed in the annex. in the time between the two, somebody had to know they were being attacked. >> bob: it's not a question they knew they were attacked but to confirm the intelligence agency, that the finding this is a terror cyst attack it's not possible. >> kimberly: it is possible. they had intelligence and reports prior to the ince tent that there was unrest and problems in the area. they knew that. they saw what happened. in 24 hours they labeled this a terrorist attack. let me finish, please. in order to release assets. special forces, seals,

.fbiison the ground. if we treat the al qaeda elements that attacked our consulate and american citizens --. jenna: you're comfortable calling them al qaeda elements. >> that's what the secretary of state said there was al qaeda connection, al qaeda in the meg greg. whatever you want to call them they're radical extremists that killed innocent americans and trying to undermined the libyan people. they should be held as enemy combattants not as common criminals if we catch them. jenna: we're waiting for fbi to get into benghazi. we're being told that the security situation is not secure enough for them to go in. something about that doesn't make sense. we're the most powerful nation in the world yet the fbi can't go into benghazi? why? >> when qaddafi fell the militias are providing security throughout the country and throughout different regions in the country. there is no strong central libyan army. john mccain and i went to libya months ago and came back, listen, spend all your time and attention building a national army to replace these militias, defang these militias. so you

happened in benghazi,thefbican'tget within 400 miles there to examine the evidence which is already being destroyed, so it's going to be hard to make a case. what about this letter that you have sent asking for answers about what went wrong in benghazi? >> well i have the letter here with me. i could show it to you. i wouldn't change anything. let me be crystal clear as chairman of that committee, and i hope this gets out to other people who are listening about this. >> and i should point out i've got the letter here too. we've gone through it. >> republicans are working overtime to try to exploit a very normal, run of the course, admin strative letter that we agreed to on a bipartisan basis in our committee, simply to get some additional questions put in front of the state department that are part of their already existing investigation. this is not a challenge. it is nothing new. it is not something out of the ordinary. and i agreed to do it as a matter of bipartisanship because we thought these were important questions that people ought to be examining. >> but aren't you concerne

department that there were increasing security concerns in benghazi?thefbisaysit is too dangerous to be in benghazi, which is why none of them are there now. is that because the>> as we dets of what took place there and how that attack took place, it became clear that there were terrorists who had planned that attack. that is when i came to that conclusion. as to who was involved, what specific groups were involved, i think the investigation that is ongoing hopefully will determine that. >> about a day after? >> it took a while to get some feedback as to what exactly happened at that location. >> there was a thread of intelligence reporting that groups were seeking to coalesce, but there was not anything specific, and certainly not anything specific to the consulate that i am aware of. as far as the risks of the fbi reported, you really would have to ask them why they made that determination. >> did you make the state department aware of the intelligence? >> the intelligence that we all get is broadly shared among intelligence agencies and all integency partners. >> i wanted to go

in washington, chief of staff tothefbidirectorrobert meueller and he began the justice department lawyer to fill the position as the attorney general for national security he then served as the homeland security adviser to president george w. bush and is now in private practice in washington. ken, please. spec the panel starts off with a reference to playboy magazine, but i will see if i can catch my breath and go forward. thanks very much, pete. good to be here. i've been asked to talk about three cases. 1i guess you could call a national security case and then number to a more regular case. let me start with the national security case and that is called blabber versus amnesty international. it's actually standing case but it's a standing case relating to a challenge to what's called the fisa amendment act passed in 2008, and was an amendment through a very substantial amount of the foreign intelligence surveillance act passed in 1978, and to understand the standing issue of the stakes at play you have to understand the merits a little bit so let me get into them. >> for those watching